Tag Archives: political correctness

When We Look At Ted Cruz, We See the Alamo

the_alamo
The Alamo Today

It was not until the last 24 hours, after 13 days of siege, that a real battle ensued. In the battle, the Alamo defenders fought valiantly and nearly all were killed including Jim Travis, Jim Bowie, and Davey Crockett.

The defense of the Alamo allowed General Sam Houston to build a large enough army to route Santa Anna and his men. “Remember The Alamo” was a constant battle cry at the Battle of San Jacinto, six weeks later. In the battle that lasted only 18 minutes, roughly 630 Mexican troops were killed and 730 captured while only 9 Texans died. Three weeks after being captured, Santa Anna signed a peace treaty, paving the way for the Republic of Texas.

The men who fought and died in Texas were ordinary people who took up arms to defend a great country. With the threat of death hovering above them for 13 days, they refused to leave their post (yes, a very tiny group did) and surrender. Even Davey Crockett, a man who already served as a United States Congressman, took up arms to defend Texas. Nearly all politicians today can learn a very big lesson from the men who lost their lives. There is a greater good besides your own self-interests. Politicians need to stop their petty differences and make the correct political sacrifices even if it costs them their career. They must be able to stand up to the political correctness without worry about what the consequences might be.

Ted Cruz is a Texan, and he acts like it. He is not afraid of demonizing his own party and possibly sacrificing his career in order to bring our country back to what the founding fathers fought for. The American people have had enough of the political correctness that has been drowning this country and holding us back from the being the great power we used to be. Washington should mark this day, March 6, as National “Remember the Alamo” day in honor of those who gave their lives and the selfless sacrifices they made.

Read it all.

Attitude Adjusting On Sliding Scale Of Islam

Muslims_praying
Muslims praying in the streets...
THERE ARE THOSE WHO THINK the tide has turned on the question of militant Islam, moderate Muslims, and the algebra of just getting along. Some believe as a result of Jack Straw's recent admission of concern over Muslim women's use of veils to cover their faces in British society and PM Tony Blair's call for full discussion on the Muslim conflict with modernity has signalled a sea change in mood for free speech traditions long stymied by the political correctness crowd.

Calling out for more common sense, these free speech advocates suggest that the rules of the game seem to have changed, that the genie is out of the box, so to speak, and isn't going back. They believe that the growing popularity of these views has been picked up by politicians at each end of the spectrum. Much of this is pure political vote grabbing, they admit, but quickly add that they are damn glad the politicians are using this particular issue to highlight voter unrest.

The right-wing BNP is not exactly a favorite among these new defenders of free speech, but they are comforted by the new strategies surfacing in regard to what is a very obvious problem: militant Muslims in their midst.

One observer of the Muslim controversy has stated, "The evidence that there is something wrong with Islam itself is just about overwhelming. Only a few pieces of critical information are needed to cinch it in the minds of millions."

Says another online pundit, "I think this observation is grievously mistaken."

1) More information, more data, more facts, will not be effective against the PC template by which millions in the West surgically detach Islam itself from the problems caused by Islam.

2) Sufficient information is already out there.

3) Millions of people whose minds are formed by the PC template already know sufficient information about Islam, but their minds filter that information.

4) It is not the knowledge of information alone that forms a person's opinion: it is the interpretative filter by which that information is fit into various cognitive and analytical slots in that person's mind.

5) Unless we decontruct the interpretative filter of the PC template, no amount of information, no mountains of data about the perniciousness of Islam, will be sufficient to change most minds affected by PC.

Summarizing the polarity of opinions is easy. It goes like this: the world community as a whole is being hurt by Muslims who are trying to make us all into dhimmis, and by the PC liberals, who have a very warped view about tolerance. I agree with this summary.

Anders Breivik The Norwegian

Anders Breivik
Anders Breivik, Norwegian terrorist
AS QUIET NORWAY BEGINS TO bury its dead after a homegrown atrocity, the Leftist corporate media slips en masse into familiar gears spitted with gobs of war grease and irrational grievance once again...

The attacks on 22 July 2011 by Norwegian Anders Breivik, 32, were a shock to the nation. The mad man first bombed government buildings in Oslo, which resulted in eight deaths. He then carried out a mass shooting at a camp of the Workers' Youth League (AUF) of the Labour Party on the island of Utøya where he killed 69 people, mostly teenagers.

Breivik was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia by the court-appointed psychiatrists. According to their report, Breivik acted compulsively based on a delusional thought universe. Among other things, he alluded to himself as a future regent of Norway pending a takeover by a Templar-like organization. Imagining himself as regent, his ideas included organizing Norwegians in reservations and using them in breeding projects. Other psychiatrists disagree that he is psychotic or schizophrenic, and on 13 January 2012, after much public pressure, the Oslo district court ordered a second expert panel to evaluate Breivik's mental state...

Remember Pastor Terry Jones. Back then, our beloved media said that because the BAD BAD Pastor Jones burnt the Quran, Muslim innocents were spontaneously filled with the great spirit of righteous revenge and had no choice but to kill lying scheming Christians (or anybody else unfortunate enough to be caught in the path of their holy anger) found across Islam's pride of nations. This was lamentable but because they were "provoked" to lash out by the evil machinations of said pastor, the darling Left, from sea to shining sea, befitting the politically correct psychological mantra for the past generation or two, were only too pleased to announce that these irrational murderous outbursts by poor innocent Muslims were perfectly understandable and hardly mentionable.

Thanks goodness for rational thought...

Similarly, we should now expect our loving, intelligent, critically-prepared, and honest corporate media to proclaim the actions of Anders Breivik are to be squarely blamed on those hundreds of thousands of Muslim psychotics who have been noisy but thank goodness, bloody, vicious, and vile practitioners of global terrorism the past few decades or so.

But not so, read more carefully the tea leaves...

Locked into the moral relativistic matrix that passes for political reality these days, the paradigm of sticking firm to the preponderance of evidence is no longer likely, because coprporate media must at all times measure the moment against its agenda to upheave the entire social framework that only fifty years ago was understood by a greater portion of the planet to be the most humane and thriving system humanity had ever experienced.

Pastor Terry
Pastor Terry Jones
If Terry Jones burning the Qu'ran is reason enough for Muslim pledges to indulge their fetishes for ritual murder, then certainly the thousands of terrorist attacks against the West and elsewhere are more than enough reason for this Norwegian—who wrote extensively impuning all possible detractors, constructing an image of one who is only trying to protect his homeland from the invasion of a foreign enemy—to execute the horrific reign of terror he committed.

But of course, few among us can accept that tautology. Where would that take us? Tit for tat, eye for eye, and other laws of equivalency, have long been a persuasive but incindiary inducement to commit all sorts of awful, repugnant acts against God, Man, and Law.

The fact that the history of warfare is prefaced with just such rhetorical conclusions should not persuade us to thrown the baby into the bath, any more than we would throw the baby out with the bath water. And while we are not talking apples and oranges, we are still talking about fruit. Moral relativity is not to blame here. Suppression of ALL non-conforming thought is the problem, and it's a BIG problem.

Anders Breivik, whether we like all, some, or none of what he believed or not, had compiled more or less a political perspective, a manifesto, a creed, one man's point of view. Whether much of it was plagiarized and from whom misses the point, particularly since those with whom he is in disagreement, notably, the followers of Mohammed, are hardly the paragons of critical writing.

Despite the insulated rigors of politically correct, top down, either-or dichotomies that liberty embracing citizens once upon a time emphatically rejected as patently unsuited for the universal expression of a free people, an individual, even a condemned one, is entitled to have his or her position made known when under investigation by a free press. And isn't this what Breivik himself, in his own word, ultimately desired.

However, just as it perverts the privilege of truth in terms of Breivik by pronouncing him Evil Incarnate on one hand, and mentally deranged on the other by writing into his broad political portfolio associations which just don't exist, while condemning others whom corporate has dismissed as persona non grata who have little or nothing in common with his ideology, the media is unmasked as little more than a purveyor of snacks, small details, unconnected dots, blind alleys, annoying breaks in the action they require to keep the zoo animals fed. Zoo animals.

There are also tasteless witch-hunts going on in Sweden. Mostly against the Sweden Democrats and even against individual politicians from that party, one of the being Erik Hellsborn just for agreeing and explaining some points in ABB’s manifesto.
When corporate media systematically ignores not only the abhorrent acts of violence daily committed in the name of islam, it also ignores a genuine appraisal of the Islamic creed along with other self-organized rantings of the Muslim terrorists, and by doing so, it does its general readership a great disservice, and in fact is nothing more than the stifling of both free speech and the pertinent facts required for the free defense of liberty and justice in a nation at war with these ideologues and covertly, their host nations. Come clean, fight clean, we urge our leadership, whistling in and out of the halls of Montezuma and the shores of Tripoli.

By hearing all, we know more. More is bad, they say. Gotta keep the fascist trains running on time. And this is precisely why we are fed less, to know less, to work more, and to spend everything we've got so that we can be softened up by corporate media hacks and all its political and business cronies who know their fast-tracked Marx (concentrating all capital at the top) to better keep the zoo animals in check.

And the fact that Breivik gunned down native Norwegians, privileged children of the darling Left, not cold-blooded, Allahu Ackbar bellowing, run of the mill peace-loving Muslims, is hardly mentioned in this turf war for Breivik's eternal corpse. Does this choice of target, despite his explanations, make the Norwegian protagonist a coward, or somehow simply add to the confused mystique of this alleged racist?

There are also tasteless witch-hunts going on in Sweden. Mostly against the Sweden Democrats and even against individual politicians from that party, one of the being Erik Hellsborn just for agreeing and explaining some points in ABB’s manifesto. Everyone against islam is to be demonized now just because of ABB. It’s like blaming Paul McCartney for the Charles Manson murders just because he wrote Helter Skelter which happened to be one of Manson’s favourite songs at the time.—Robin Shadowes

Yep, corporate media and the switchbladed Lefties continue to trump up marginal Islamic victimhood while ignoring the full unadulterated political manifestos of both the Muslims and their equally doctrinaire detractors.

The unforgiving sin.

Breaking Free Of The Stupid Undergrounds

Arguing Against Groupthink
Arguing Against Groupthink
THIS IS, NEEDLESS TO SAY, NOT how one should approach a discussion over what is sure to be a difficult sell to those who already feel they know everything they need to know on a difficult topic, and instead presume you are just an idiot, a racist, and probably both.

In this photo, let's suppose we have a husband and wife, or perhaps two old friends, each professionals, a college professor and a bank executive, and let's agree it's not germane which job is whose. Woman or man, based only on what you see in the photo and what you already ascertain about the general culture, who do you think is the person more knowledgeable, who is concerned about a serious topic worthy of analysis?

Here's our profile. Based on what we know about how certain evidence breaks in this PC society, we presume the man to be the calm but vigilant anti-jihadist who prefers evidential persuasion leaving the woman to be a hardcore politically correct leftist claiming the higher moral ground, tooth and nail, certain of her superiority. If the roles were reversed, and it was she who was frightened of jihad, Islam, and its strategies for conquering the world, she would win no argument with this sort of display, even if this cowardly friend of hers is a wimpish hollow man of the politically correct variety, stoned on his own ignorance.

So read on...

FOLLOWING 9/11, FOLLOWING MADRID, FOLLOWING the London bombing, following Bali, in fact following the whole panoply of Muslim violence at that point, I listened and listened to political and media reaction.

Tiny minority. Religion of Peace. Rich Diversity. Untold wealth brought by immigration. Vibrant communities.

On and on the cliched excuses fell from establishment mouths, their voices united in a wholesale pass for what the rest of us saw as a religion intent on getting its way and killing as many possible in the process. Something was grossly askew. Something was missing. Why was our collective intelligence being so badly insulted by politically correct morons, parroting the same old fables?

Then the thought occurred. These people, wallowing in dire ignorance are merely talking heads and spewers of easily demolished platitudes. They do it because they all do it. It's the easy route. However, apart from what my eyes and ears told me about the current situation I was quite unaware of the history and true doctrine of Islam.

So off to Amazon and a few clicks later up it popped. Robert Spencer's Politically Incorrect guide to Islam and the Crusades. The cover alone gave the aura that this would be no half assed apologist's polemic so I bought it.

That was about five years ago, and what refreshment? What revelation?

Thus armed, my argument with friends either riled them mildly or aroused such anger that I realised something was not quite right. These were educated people. Lecturers, photographers, TV people, a couple of (largely unsuccesful) actors, senior managers plus of course the remoras and hangers on. One thing did unite them and that was the left.

My epiphany started at that point. Buoyed by the great introduction Robert's insight's offered, I bought more. And more. And despite all of this well researched truth they still didn't believe me. I was a racist and that was that.

For me that was when their bubble burst. All that came out was hot air and dogma. In other words the lies of self preening liberals, basking in self proclaimed liberality. And nothing more

They were [TS] Elliot's Hollow Men devoid of any individuality of thought and addicted to the groupthink which infests their brand of society.

A few years down the line I jettisoned the dross. If the unvarnished truth could not persuade them, why bother? I'd say this experience is quite informative. It obviously changed me. What was that thing about truth setting you free?

And all because of Robert's book...

Logdon

Who are we to improve upon this piece of brilliant writing? What better critique of the often undulating process of sorting out the real from the unreal can we offer to those who will not heed a word of it, but will resort to vile slanders, misinformation, hyperbole, and logical fallacies to thwart our insistence on using the fullest measure of our intelligence, not merely a caricatured obedience to some counterfeit ideal?

A Jihad Watch commentator transcribes a personal but oh so familiar path to intellectual sanity when trying to figure out why what we must process day in and day out on nearly every subject pertaining to Islam when filtered by the mainstream media just doesn't meet the smell, much less the taste test. Leftism is a cult of wishful thinking, and is no longer a ridiculous clique, but is now the deep-rooted establishment.

The courage and resolve so many of us must muster in breaking free of ANY of the stupid undergrounds described by Paul Mann is no different than breaking free of the groupthink of this so-called religious or political cult known as Islam and its new best friends, the radical Left of the West.

More The Same Of Those Subterranean Homesick Blues

Posted by: GeorgiaBoy61

Iran Barks Like Hyena
Iran Barks Like Hyena

I COULD NOT AGREE MORE with the substance of your column. Over and over again, I have asked myself since the 9-11 attacks, how it could be that virtually everyone in the [civilized] west, including many Americans, feels compelled to use euphemistic language when speaking of Islamic violence. Why is everyone walking on eggshells? The few who dare to voice their honestly-felt opinions about Islam are derided as racists, xenophobes, Islamophobes, etc. The whole phenomenon is still somewhat mystifying to me, but reading Mark Steyn's "America Alone" and other works has helped bring this strange behavior into focus somewhat. First, nearly all of our cultural elites and political/military leaders are either in denial, or have been co-opted in some manner.

Second, the pervasive influence of cultural Marxism—otherwise known as political correctness—is everywhere. Americans never used to apologize for voicing unpopular or unpleasant views or opinions; now they do—hence the triumph of P.C. Third, many of us have forgotten what the responsibilities of free people entail, c.f. eternal vigilance, protection of the Judeo-Christian heritage, et cetera.

Little-used, and dulled by years of easy affluence, many of us have forgotten how (if we ever knew in the first place) how to exist as free men. Fourth, cowardice. It isn't simply that many in the west are physically afraid of the believers of Islam; they are also intellectually and morally overmatched and intimidated. They lack the skills and fortitude to engage those bullying them.

Fifth, is apathy. Many people are too focused on the trivialities of modern existence to care about the renewed march of Islam. Of one thing I am certain—we cannot effectively oppose a foe we dare not name.

We risk the embarrassment of repeating ourselves among supposedly intelligent men and women, not because we think our readers are stupid, but because we believe our readers think we are stupid. Yet, nothing is so realistic in the realm of mathematical certainty than the political engines of blunt force survival.

Put another way, if Elohim wants to use an Objectivist to do His work, they will do so. Research the Voice of God to the Hebrew Jeremiah when describing the Babylonian King Nebecannezzar as His servant. Just one of many examples of conscription into The Great Plan. Belief in God is not necessary. There is no escape from God in that model.

The personal acts of disengaging from perishable folly to embrace the realities of this brutal race towards intelligent survival must not be underestimated, or too casually declined. Here are two more stringent points of view, compelling in their own intelligent way:

Ihis country better start circling the wagons of Christianity, and start re-developing a strong UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and holding our elected officials to the constitution or we are done! Rejecting militant Islam has to be a major priority!

If your grandfathers had taken to blathering on about "Naziofascists", "Nazionazis", "Nazists", "radical Nazis" and "Nazi extremists", let alone about "Hijackers of the Great Political Party of Peace", unless they were running a fever something just awful, their own mothers would have blistered their britches before General Patton could even get to them. —Bessie

You betcha! And from a board debating the essence of birthday girl Ayn Rand's Objectivist thought:

Following that logic, certain activities that have become profit-making are not necessarily meant to be so. It's funny that the example of saving a life was brought up—perhaps, according to Ms. Rand, healthcare should not be a profit-making enterprise, but she would place it more in the realm of social responsibility under direct government supervision—"morally" superior to the general welfare than the current Affordable Care Act that has so many Atlas Shrugged thumpers fit to be tied.

I disagree. A lot of these activities were started by churches and philanthropists, ie, hospitals, libraries, et cetera, and did not become money makers until government stepped in to regulate them. Even now, someone trying to feed hungry people cannot do so without permission from the government. Ask the people who were in Katrina who provided more direct help, the government or individuals. Government just does more advertising because they can then charge it to the taxpayers.

Alan Greenspan's statist policies would have never been supported by Ayn Rand. Anyone that has actually read Ayn Rand would never suggest that Greenspan held to her ideas. Her positions are the strongest that exist against any type of corruption...maybe too many business people are afraid that if they stand up for the moral virtue of profit, they will have to forgo the moral loopholes that are accepted in our current system.

Alan Greenspan, an initiated member of the Rand cult, used her totally misguided ideas to run this country into the ground. Besides that, all she did was give false legitimacy to soulless, compassionless, sociopathy. An a-moral crackpot through and though. But all is not lost, Wall Street losers. Your woeful ignorance of both Rand and Greenspan tell us much more about you than them.

To describe her philosophy and ethics as "a-moral" (as many believers in God, gods, unicorns, and gremlins do, claiming that only religionists—you know, those organizations created by men to control, keep ignorant, deny/suspend reality/reason as it suits, fleece, and murder hundreds of millions of others in God's name—possess a monopoly on morality denied to an a-theist) is a grotesque libel.

Put another way, if Elohim wants to use an Objectivist to do His work, they will do so. Research the Voice of God to the Hebrew Jeremiah when describing the Babylonian King Nebecannezzar as His servant. Just one of many examples of conscription into The Great Plan. Belief in God is not necessary. There is no escape from God in that model.

Objectivism and its Ethics shine as the greatest philosophical development yet of a proper morality for dignified men and the enhancement of life (as opposed to corrupt original-sinners who worship death and some imaginary afterlife). Ayn Rand's morality is of such comprehensive stature and sufficiently rigid in nature, that I have little doubt one of your self-humiliating ignorance would be incapable of fully comprehending—let alone living up to it.

Oh my, my beloved America has become such an arch-schizophrenic phenomenon!

1. Rand promoted the ideas that government control over the economy and money supply was immoral and would be ruinous to the economy.

2. Greenspan, a who at one time was friends with Rand, later headed the Federal Reserve, and exercised the exact controls that Rand had warned against—which resulted in the exact sort of outcomes that she warned against.

So, how do you conclude that Greenspan "used her totally misguided ideas to run this country into the ground"? Alan Greenspan's statist policies would have never been supported by Ayn Rand. Anyone that has actually read Ayn Rand would never suggest that Greenspan held to her ideas. Her positions are the strongest that exist against any type of corruption...maybe too many business people are afraid that if they stand up for the moral virtue of profit, they will have to forgo the moral loopholes that are accepted in our current system.

A society and government that believed in the same principles as Ayn Rand would tolerate none of the corruption we see today in business—and would demand personal responsibility from businessman, without loopholes to fall back on if times got tough or they wanted to be lazy or shortsighted.

Maybe too many of today's businesspeople are too afraid of the personal responsibility they'd have to take if they took Ayn Rand's stance on the morality of profit.

Le Pen Convicted For An Opinion

le-pen
Jean-Marie Le Pen

Here's an interesting item. Jean-Marie Le Pen has been convicted of racism and fined 10,000 euros for remarks he made about Muslims four years ago. La Croix reports:

Jean-Marie Le Pen was fined 10,000 euros on Wednesday by the Paris appeals court for provocation to discrimination, hatred and racial violence, as a result of his remarks about Muslims printed in the April 2004 edition of the extreme right-wing journal Rivarol.

The 11th chamber of the court of appeals also sentenced the president of the Front National to 5000 euros in damages to be paid to the plaintiff, the Human Rights League. The lower criminal court had "nullified the suit" against him; thus he escaped conviction at the first hearing.

On April 2, 2004, the criminal court of Paris had condemned Jean-Marie Le Pen for an interview he gave to Le Monde on April 19, 2003, in which he declared: "The day when we have in France not 5 million but 25 million Muslims they will be our masters. The French people will hug the walls, they will walk on the sidewalks with their eyes lowered. And if they don't, they will be stopped: 'Why are you looking at me like that, are you looking for a fight?' And you will have to run, or else you'll be beaten," he added.

A month later Le Pen was back on the offensive in an interview in Rivarol: "Furthermore whenever I said that with 25 million Muslims in France the French people will hug the walls, people in the audience would say to me, and rightly so: 'But Mr. Le Pen, that is already the case now.'"

It was for these new remarks that he was convicted on Wednesday.

"The defendant pits the French against the Muslims (...) and attempts to arouse (...) a feeling of rejection and hostility towards the Muslim community," the court decided Wednesday. "His words instill in the mind of the public the belief that the security of the French depends on rejecting Muslims and that fear and apprehension, linked to their growing presence in France, will cease if their numbers decrease and if they disappear," the court added.

Orwellian thought control is nearly complete. The Anti-Christ is ascending.

Another Feckless Fix From The PC Folks

Married To Children
Islam Where Married To Children Is Normal
From a bloke named Monty:

Meanwhile, the BBC are serving up another steaming plate of multicultural tripe to their viewers. The drama "White Girl", in which a dysfunctional, broken, unemployed white family are dumped in a mainly Muslim housing project, was broadcast last night. In this narrative, the English are portrayed as feckless human trash, and the Muslims as wonderful, stable, generous human beings, devoted to their children. I guess it must have skipped the part where the Muslim schoolgirls were being offered for sale in marriage to their uncles and cousins in Pakistan. The whole dog and pony show made me livid.

Another feckless fix from the PC folks.